ISSUE:
Whether the testimony of an accomplice, who was not prosecuted or tendered a pardon, was admissible as evidence?
Whether photostatic copies of documents could be used as evidence when the originals were unavailable?
Whether prior exposure of a witness to suspects' photographs invalidated the witness’s identification?
Whether selective prosecution and the use of an accomplice as a witness violated constitutional protections under Articles 14 and 20?
RULE:
Accomplice testimony is admissible if it is corroborated, regardless of whether the accomplice is prosecuted or tendered a pardon.
Photostatic copies are admissible as secondary evidence if originals are unavailable and there is no suggestion of fabrication.
Witness identification remains valid if corroborated by independent evidence, even if the witness has prior exposure to suspects' photographs.
Selective prosecution of an accomplice as a witness does not violate constitutional protections, provided it is a legitimate prosecutorial strategy.